Deals with plenty of worldbuiding on "the ape world after-Caesar", and I quite liked that Caesar is presented as this mythological figure whose legend is misused by the next generation. But it doesn't stand on a best-written story, at least not after the first trilogy, with the 3rd film already showing its weakness.
There's a whole new generation of apes and humans taking the spotlight here, and I feel like this setting could've been utilized better as it can be a fresh start to the world for new audience (the audience being as clueless as Noa or Mae here). But there's no "real" conflict... the film plants us the seed of doubt toward Mae and her supposedly ulterior motives that Proximus sometimes appear to be a reasonable voice, but there's no payoff to that build up, even when the film ends with Noa agreeing in some part with Proximus.
The film rehashes the question of "can apes live together side by side with humans", which makes sense given that these are new generation of apes and humans, but we've seen that in the 2nd film already, and I feel like this film just ends up being a filler to set the stage for the sequel.
Not that MCU is good, but this film feels like a weaker DCEU version of Thor: Dark World (with Orm siding with Arthur - they even throw a shade at Loki) and Black Panther (with Atlantis opening up to the world and Arthur preaching about kindness and technology to solve... climate change, lol).
The film has no stake at all. Throughout the film you'll see some supposed tense between the characters, but every instances of supposed betrayal or any semblance of conflict is a cop out or played out as a joke. People get hurt, they are burned or stabbed badly, but they recover minutes later. The emotional hook is supposed to be Arthur's failure to manage his kingdom but this never got developed further. Instead we see some council lecturing Arthur in one scene and Orm's motivational speech about believing in yourself in the next. The Thor-Loki-like reluctant brotherly dynamics of Arthur-Orm is mostly about a competition of delivering funnier banters.
The film is a jumble of one action scene to another, but even if you count this as an action film, the action sequences are super underdeveloped. Most action scenes literally happened off-screen, and while the camera moves swiftly to deliver some speed when there is an actual action, it lacks the punch and impact when our heroes and villains exchange blows. The penultimate showdown with Black Manta is super short, and the centuries-slumbering monster-king of the titular The Lost Kingdom is vanquished in one trident blow.
I like the visual and some world-building of Atlantis though. Flashy CGI, beautiful flowing hair. The scenes in the bar, the underworld, and daily lives of Atlantean makes me feel like it's an aquatic version of Star Wars galactic life. Much potential here, but I don't know if it's something that the directors will tap into further in the next films.
For a final send-off to DCEU before James Gunn's takeover, The Lost Kingdom delivers its job as a popcorn flick Christmas blockbuster albeit with too much forgettable substandard story and action sequences.
The concept is intriguing. The theme of local wisdom set in Saranjana, a mythical city beneath the waters of South Kalimantan, is captivating. Unfortunately, the execution is embarrassingly poor.
The film aims to blend horror, drama, and science fiction, but fails entirely. The storyline is incredibly flat—while this might work for a horror film, the execution here is so poor that the film lacks any grounding whatsoever.
The film starts without any clear direction, featuring a band concert somewhere, followed by a petty drama among the band members leading to the vocalist's disappearance. There's a hint of horror initially, but it abruptly intensifies when the vocalist seems possessed and wanders off to Saranjana (we find out after 15 mins that the film actually takes place in South Kalimantan). The band embarks on a quest before the film transitions into a horror segment as they try to find their way to Saranjana. Once the mythical city is revealed, a science fiction element is introduced, closing with a return to drama.
The horror is subpar, the drama fails to evoke any emotion, and the science fiction lacks imagination.
Let's discuss the horror first. The film markets itself as a "horror" film, but it merely throws various supernatural entities without any horror tension. Pocong appears, a supernatural baby emerges, the spirit of a dancer appears, but everything comes off as absurd. The scene with the pocong is particularly ridiculous. It seems the director hoped to induce horror through quantity—every appearance of a pocong involves a multitude (sometimes a dozen), yet there's no buildup whatsoever. The characters rely solely on screaming in fear without taking any meaningful action.
There's one absurd scene where the character floats down a river full of pocongs. Suddenly, one pocong emerges from the river (among a dozen others just watching from a distance), and the character just hysterically screams in fear, and the pocong does nothing but stare blankly. Suddenly, their boat starts moving again after they stop screaming. Another foolish scene shows a character trance-dancing due to possession, and another character suddenly becomes possessed as well when approaching. The solution for the character still in control? Get close to them and shake their body to bring them back to consciousness, even though a moment before they realized that being close might lead to possession. Strangely, only the main character avoids possession with no reason explained.
Now, onto the science fiction part. Saranjana, the unseen city with an advanced civilization. Our protagonists, after a bloody and sweaty struggle, finally steps into Saranjana (this isn't a spoiler as it's in the trailer, which is also a dumb decision). However, this mystical city turns out to be just like Dubai. The portrayal of Wakanda, which I still think lacks imagination, is miles better. Here in Saranjana the supposedly futuristic city consisting only of skyscrapers with Arabic writing (basically Dubai). The streets are paved. The cars are Toyota Avanza, the motorcycles are scoopy. It's genuinely sad and utterly lacking in imagination from the concept artist.
Whether it's a budget issue or a vision problem, I don't know. There are futuristic gadgets in the story, but they're reduced to simple smartwatches with 3D holograms to be easily comprehensible for the audience. The effects are also terrible. Despite the city supposedly having advanced surveillance, the surveillance cameras are Xiaomi brand (yes, the white ones). The police guarding the city don't use any vehicles to chase criminals; instead, they run barefoot. People wearing traditional Banjar clothing seem to be directly transplanted: in this supposedly super futuristic city, their traditional attire remains unchanged.
The irony is that there should be a contrast between the high-tech city and the low-tech traditional clothing. However, because the depiction of the city is incredibly low-tech and trashy, I don't feel anything. It's quite amusing.
Finally, the drama.
The director should have hired a screenwriter instead of writing the script themselves. The dialogues are incredibly cringeworthy. The main character has a talk-no-jutsu like Naruto that can change people's minds just by rambling and getting angry. Whoever was responsible for editing should be fired because every drama scene feels rushed. In one scene, a character is determined, and in the next scene, they suddenly cry and change their mind.
I heard that the budget for this film wasn't large. But they managed to fly the film crew to South Kalimantan and shoot on location? Instead of spending the money on shooting on location, it should have been used to hire a more skilled concept artist and an experienced screenwriter. No one cares if the film shot in a city forest in front of a housing complex or on the actual location, as long as it looks authentic. Authenticity is achieved through adept film production, not by jetting off to a set location.
The only positive thing about this film is the theme music. The Saranjana theme is mesmerizing, very ethnic. The acting is standard for Indonesian film standards. Everything else is truly... a headache to watch.
E for Effort though. Hopefully the director learned a lot from the process and someone (or the director in the future) will pick up this fascinating myth with a better project.
Let's be clear: this episode is like a slightly less charming version of Call Me By Your Name. That's why it feels rather slow and uninteresting in its first half. The performances between the two female leads could have been stronger, although I can see Mackenzie Davis trying her best.
The second half however swiftly hits you like a truck once the sci-fi element kicks in. Suddenly, all the clinging, drama, and attachment in the first half make sense (although it's still not an excuse for the slow burn - they could've made it for 10 minutes less). The moment when Yorkie and Kelly eventually meet is trademark Black Mirror, delivering heartbreaking, bitter reality in the show's fashion, and the episode maintains this emotional tone until a few minutes before the end.
In an unusual turn, the episode concludes with a more light-hearted, upbeat tone. Initially, I felt like it sidelined the heavy burden of the question between life and death, as Kelly aptly put it, "why didn't she have the chance?" But after some pondering, I realized the episode wants to present a more optimistic view of the inevitable end we all face. In the end, it's about how we choose to spend "the rest of it," as Kelly decided in the end. It's a more bright take on Blade Runner's pondering: if it feels real, then it's real.
Bandersnatch stands out as the most Twilight Zone-esque and perhaps the best episode of Black Mirror to date, thanks not only to its innovative and gimmicky presentation, but also its ultimate secret ending.
A slight nod to other comments: when following a straightforward path, Bandersnatch can feel somewhat bland and slightly uninteresting. Even though the various choices may lead to very meta and/or interesting schizophrenic endings, this isn't the main appeal of the episode.
The true gem of Bandersnatch lies in the culmination of all choices you make and the different endings or dead-ends you encounter. As Colin Ritman puts it, what matters is the choices that led you to a particular path, rather than the specific fate you experience in one lifetime.
Here's a hint: when faced with a dead-end, don't hit rewind and choose another option; instead, select from the options the episode provides. It remembers your choices and will open up alternative routes you can explore.
Only after going through those multiple dreaming sequences, RPG/visual novel playthroughs, and exhaustively exploring Bandersnatch's depth, do you truly appreciate its richness. Just like Stefan, who finally exhausts his options through the experiences of hallucinogens and brutal murders, you'll encounter a bittersweet moment when the episode reveals a secret ending that, to me, feels like the canon conclusion.
At the core of Stefan's obsession with "multiple choices" adventures is one pivotal moment when he wishes he could revert to be with his mom, accompanying her through her eventual demise, regardless of his prior knowledge about it. As "O Superman" by Laurie Anderson plays, the episode takes us back to the first sequence of the episode, and both Stefan and the audience finally find a sense of peace after the Jacob's Ladder-esque nightmare - asking if, after all, it is the lack of acceptance that burdens us when we grieves ourself into the deep hole of what ifs.
Two hours and half have past by the time the credits roll; Bandersnatch asked me if I want to give another go. I closed my eyes and put it to rest.
A welcome return to the exaggerated action swagger post-Fast V, Fast X: Part One delivers a thrilling over-the-top action flick.
The film shares a similar issue with Mission Impossible: Dead Reckoning Part 1: it attempts thoroughly to set the stage for the grand finale in Part 2, connecting everything to past films and reuniting the entire cast, even if only briefly. This effort to showcase familial bonds between characters sometimes leads to overdrawn comedy and drama sequences. Several sequences, like the Roman vs Tej fistfight or Letty vs. Cipher brawl, feel like padding to extend the 2.5-hour runtime. And there are character deaths... but as the credits rolled I've accepted that it might not really mean anything. As that one obtuse now-Disney-franchise told us, "No one's ever really gone" in Fast.
Despite this, Fast X manages to maintain a relatively well-paced tone. The film is cognizant that dialogue is never its strong suit and it avoids getting bogged down in overtly serious drama with weak lines, as seen in F9. It also steers clear of relying heavily on exposition to create tension and drama, a trap Dead Reckoning Part 1 fell into. The film effectively brings back the best formula from previous Fast movies, featuring thrilling speed car sequences and gadgety/car gimmicks, while discarding elements that didn't quite work. Jason Momoa's portrayal of Dante is a refreshing departure from the usual tough guy typecast, and the tie-ins to previous Fast films work better here than in Dead Reckoning Part 1,
Although the all-star cast doesn't allow every character to shine (this is, after all, Dom's film), Fast X remains an enjoyable ride from start to finish. Looking forward to the Part 2.
This installment fell short for me, and I didn't particularly enjoy Fallout either, so it's not a matter of comparing campy action movies from the 1990s vs the stylish Nolan-esque action in the 2010s, as Jordy mentioned in another comment.
My biggest issue lies in the film feeling like a setup for Cruise's Ethan Hunt's sendoff in Part 2 and the rebuilding of the IMF team for future films. As a sendoff preparation, it tries hard to tie back to the first MIssion Impossible, bringing back Kittridge and connecting the main antagonist, Gabriel, and the righteous agent, Briggs, to Ethan's past. As a setup for sequels, it incorporates all the MCU-esque sequel-building elements: character pep talks, recruiting new team members, bonding moments, and hints of seemingly dead characters but not-that-dead. It only lacks the typical post-credits scene.
The film, unfortunately, tends to drag in certain sequences to accomplish these two points. Scenes with Luther and Benji at the airport, proclaiming their friendship and teamwork, or the aftermath scene with Ilsa as Grace is about to join the team, feel overly explicit in driving home the theme of being alone vs being with friends. The dialogues come across as unnaturally flowing, as if the characters were reciting lines to evoke emotions, humor, or impact. Dialogue, indeed, is not the film's strongest suit, especially when compared to Ghost Protocol.
The convoluted AI plot is another drawback. While I don't mind a yet-another-Skynet storyline or campy 90s action, the long musings on AI's world domination during the party scene with Vanessa Kirby's White Widow/Alana are cringe-worthy. The stakes seem unclear, and the repeated lines about fates being written and rewritten become tiresome, especially given the dialogue-heavy sequences. There are too many expositions on how the AI is threatening yet we barely see it does anything except that one sequence where it pretends to be Benji. The film's dialogue, once again, hinders the enjoyment of these scenes.
To its credit, Dead Reckoning Part 1 does have impressive stunts (Cruise's mountain jump and train sequences need not another applause) and enjoyable choreography. When the action delivers, it truly shines. The film also starts on a strong note, with the submarine opening instilling a sense of lurking danger of a potential mysterious enemy despite ended up falling into typical Skynet tropes. The portrayal of Gabriel almost reminds me of Chigurh from No Country for Old Men, if Gabriel was given better writing. Still, the action suffers from tonally inconsistent pacing and certain action sequences that drag, such as the car chase in Italy or the awkward fight with the charming la femme Pom Klementieff's Paris in the alleyway.
To conclude, if you have ample spare time, perhaps it's still worth giving the movie a shot. Although not the best MIssion Impossible in the recent years, the setups presented in the film leave me hopeful for a promising payoff in Part 2.
A drama-thriller superhero film, Chronicle is Brightburn if it was more competent and spent its time to develop the characters. The pace can be quite slow in the first half, but its slowness is crafted in such a way that you can't help but sympathize with the confusion, exhilaration, satisfaction, disappointment, and anger the group feels throughout the film - especially Andrew. It takes you to the time when high school was full of possibilities and, at the same time, full of disappointment.
The use of "found footage", despite the at times erratic angle, helps with connecting to the guys in the film, as if you're part of the group witnessing the event unfolds. I like that the film uses different cameras (surveillance camera, others' phones, etc) to convey scenes where Andrew's footage would not make sense.
When the climax eventually hits it feels quite painful as you've seen the group's ups and downs, and you'd find yourself believing under different circumstances they would've been something else. That being said, the final showdown lacks a little bit of oomph from the hectic and chaos it caused. Perhaps the only sequences where the found footage angle could use better work.
Not the greatest film, but still worth watching.
The Flash proves to be a competent superhero film. Not the best, but a breath of fresh air amidst the hot mess that has flooded the genre in recent years. It stands on its own, requiring only a basic understanding of past character portrayals, unlike the convoluted soap opera often seen in DCEU and MCU lines.
Despite its ensemble of superheroes and characters, the film manages to strike enough of the right chords.
It balances humor without overdoing it like Shazam: Fury of the Gods, Black Adam, or any Marvel Cinematic Universe films in the last 10 years. The fanservice of Keaton's Batman is tastefully done, providing memorable lines and explosive gimmicks without overstaying his welcome. The action sequences are well-choreographed, particularly those involving Affleck's and Keaton's Batman, although the initial speedster scene falls somewhat short as Days of Future Past already sets the bar high. The most important, the film possesses a straight enough plotline to propels the story forward, but still offers moments of intrigue and uncertainty where you would ask the direction the film will be taking.
The film however stumbles in Kara/Supergirl's parts. The plot revolving around General Zod and Kara's arrival and departure feels clumsy. It underplays the significance established in Man of Steel regarding Clark's purpose on Earth, not to mention the spandex that Kara somehow brought everywhere makes her feels comical. Sasha Calle seems unable to pull a good Kara impression; her attempt to embody a complex yet tough character feels like forced, relying on screaming and unnerving facial expressions, and her decisions throughout the films appear abrupt. Her bitterness leaves more to be desired as it seems to be quickly resolved. The grand battle feels tonally inconsistent with some rock music, Keaton's soundtrack, and Kara's theme blasting over each other. Although Michael Shannon delivers a menacing performance as Zod, the thin plot he walks on undermines his presence.
Fortunately, The Flash remains true to its scale.
While the film introduces multiverses, at its heart is Barry's personal desire to save his mother. Barry isn't driven by a grand mission to save the multiverse; he's a reluctant hero who finally acts when met a seemingly dead end. One might say that the resolution offered by the film presents a fatalistic view of history, unlike the practically optimistic tone of Avengers: Endgame, but the strength of the film is not to have the final say of all of these actually work: as the climax unfolds, both Barry and the audience are left wondering where the breaking point lies in history that must remain untouched. The film avoids drowning the audience in pseudoscience for explaining the multiverse, opting for Keaton's short and humorous spaghetti metaphor. The most compelling aspect is the film's ability to maintain a personal scale despite the high stakes, leaving the audience emotionally moved with effective lines in the resolution that in the first 15 minutes of the film seemed clichéd. The ending provides a pleasant surprise, setting the stage for a fresh start in the DC Universe.
Without boasting the concept of multiverses like Doctor Strange: Multiverses of Madness, The Flash is an enjoyable soft-reboot multiversal superhero film that leaves quite an impression. Not the best superhero film certainly, but perhaps still ranking among the better ones in the multiverse/time-reversing subgenre of superhero films, possibly trailing only a few steps behind Days of Future Past.
F9 speeds onto the screen with a mix of excitement and disappointment. While I wouldn't label it as the worst installment in the franchise, it certainly lacks the punch and adrenaline rush, especially after the high note that Fast 7 played.
The film's action sequences feel disjointed, failing to jolt the anticipated adrenaline rush. The opening sequences attempted to burst into high-octane moments with explosions and spectacle, but they never really delivered the gripping excitement expected. The subsequent action scenes veer into run-of-the-mill territory, especially in the process of the Avengers-like assembling of characters with the return of Mia and Han. Many action sequences feel arbitrary, lacking narrative purpose.
However, to the film credits, the action gains momentum in its second half after the team assembled. The Fast franchise always has gimmicks and here's where the film's gimmick comes into play - electromagnetic tricks. The creative use of this concept in the final battle injects some much-needed freshness in an otherwise stale action sequences.
What makes F9 a very dull Fast film is its attempt at adopting a darker tone, which falters heavily. The pivotal brotherly feud between Dom and Jakob lacks the necessary kick for the audience to care enough about the newly introduced character. The underdeveloped relationship fails to justify the character introspection and moments of fragility. The actors struggle to convey the conflict, hindered by lackluster scripts and dialogue.
This darker tone is contrasted to the usual Fast humor and banter which fail to maintain a nice blend of tonal consistency. There is an appreciable attempt to satirize the implausibility of the characters' invincibility, a self-awareness that permeates the film. However, it feels too on-the-nose as the script repeats the point on and on.
In the end, F9 doesn't reach the heights of its predecessors, lacking in both thrilling action and bogged down by its attempt to be serious and darker. While it has its moments, it falls short of delivering the exhilarating experience fans have come to expect from the Fast & Furious franchise. If you wanted to watch F9, I suggest to skip right onto the second half. You won't miss anything.
You've seen the premise and plot of the film in other sci-fi films before. Yet it still manages to be intelligent, not spoon-feeding (which explains why the film is lost to some viewers), while still simultaneously thrilling and plot-twisting.
I've seen the twist miles away: that the robots are creating a better version of humanity, a typical sci-fi cliche but the film remains interesting along the way. It continuously straddles in showing the Mother in heartwarming scenes and pose her as a commanding presence that you keep trying to figure out what her true intention is. But the best part of this is to me the stranger-Woman herself. You've seen her archetype in every other "beware of outside" films out there (10 Cloverfield Lane comes to mind) but what makes her as a perfect setup for this film is the way she is presented: her casting, her interaction with the Daughter, her memories. All points out to the fact that she is the original daughter. The film started with saying that 38 years have passed, yet we have only a teenage Daughter. Then we are shown that 3 embryos are missing, and 1 of them being "failed", not "aborted" like the rest. Then we are shown the Daughter recalling vague memories of her past. Last, the one that was a dead giveaway to me: the Woman looks very similar to the Daughter. It all makes sense in the last scene with the stranger-Woman, as the event finally unfolded.
Of course, the film still stumbled here and there. The typical plot of unstable teenager where curiosity gets the best of them is a bit annoying as it is a tired cliche (although admittedly that's just teens being teens). The whole idea that the Mother is an authoritarian AI trying to make humanity in a better form is also a tired cliche. Given the fact that Daughter is still a teen, her taking the mantle of Mother is also unconvincing, as I'm not sure how perfectly ethical she is educated, that she can raise a kid - perhaps that's also a point of contention that the film tries to raise? What is maturity when you are breeded to be perfect?
But the intelligent way the film is presented, and most of all, the performance by Clara Rugaard as Daughter makes the ride totally worth 2 hours. I like how Daughter started as a curious, naive teen to a lady with conviction (while still retaining her naivety) by the end of the film. It's partly due to the great makeup and lighting and general cinematography, but Rugaard's acting really established the performance.
All in all, this is in no way a masterclass in sci-fi, but still an enjoyable watch to think and discuss about. Especially with the advent of ChatGPT, we may want to talk again how much we want to technically intervene societal problems, and if those problems warrant technicalization in the first place.
For a film taking multiverse at the center stage there surely is a poverty of creative vision what multiverses could be. Other than vaguely green futuristic city and people blotched in pink paint, there's barely any imagination of what other possible worlds may exist out there, e.g., the most obvious, why is America Chavez's sexuality or her parents no different than what we have now? Of course this is MCU film, not Ursula Le Guin's, so shallowness is to be expected...
... but shallowness creeps all over the segment in this film. Characters can't seem to get over one dimensional portrayal: Strange's looming over his ex-wife, Maximoff's obsession with her children, and Chavez's constant uncertainty with her powers. They went across multiverses but couldn't even get across those simplistic characterization when nothing really happens until the eventual climaxes. Characterizations are dull, featuring a lineup of people with different costumes that is only good for merchandizing but is exhibiting nothing more than simplistic "bad" and "good". Characters made dumb decisions, such as the Illuminati and Richard Reed's scene that has been memed to death. Chavez as the spotlight is incredibly bland and boring, serving as nothing more than talking McGuffin that the characters have to grasp.
I do wish the dialogues are just forgettable, but the level of cringe it induces, especially in the grand finale of the film, really made it hard to forget due to how bad it is. The plot is complete bollocks and nonsensical. Rather than a Multiverse of Madness this film feels more like a Scriptwriting of Madness.
Sure Sam Raimi's directorial touch is here and there with some camera panning and transition, but that's all about it. Visually the first Dr. Strange is better, I say. Won't even recommend it even if you have some hours to kill. Only MCU fanatics would consciously watch this one and give it a good rating.
A great sci-fi horror with strong performance from the cast and serious questions to reflect on after the credit title rolls, if only a little bit arthouse-y and very violent. People here asking about mechanics is missing the point (this is not MCU's quantum gibberish).
Thematically it raises similar questions of body, mind, and identity to Blade Runner (2049 and the original) and, to some extent, Inception. The personality test even reminds me of Blade Runner's baseline test. If we could experience multiple memories, would we still be the same person?
The horror in the film is two-fold, and perhaps not for everyone. There is no jumpscare here. It is a horror first from the almost slasher-like quality of violence. This violence is productive in the film because it helps us to figure out Tasya's character. As we initially wonder which of her multiple identities that really hers - a loving person damaged by her job? a cold-blooded killer? or something else entirely? - it slowly expresses the character of Tasya Vos not only as an assassin, but a sadistic murderer one that.
And second it is a horror from the constant suspense; the uncertainty and eeriness that lingers throughout the film. The way the event unfolds with the "botched" murder contract keeps you guessing and thinking. Was that Tasya acting? Was that Colin? What would she/he do next? Would she/he harm them?
I think this is where the extreme violence serves its second purpose. It's not bloody for the sake of bloody; it's to show an almost fetishtic obsession of gory murder juxtaposed with the humane supporting characters. The seemingly lovely individuals, ordinary people living their life waiting for their time to lie dead in the hands of a psychotic sadist. Who's really doing the killing there? Why are they doing that?
This is where the last 15 minutes reaches its disturbing climax and ending. As the pinned butterflies were put down, we were left wondering what remains of Tasya Vos. Is that a sign of the waning of his/her humanity, as the plot summary in Wikipedia suggested? Or, more creepily, who's really in that body? Was that Tasya Vos? Or was that Colin taking over Tasya's body? But if we consider her stress and struggle of cognitive disassociation as shown in the film the whole time, does it matter to ask the question of identity?
The sound design and music really helps selling the creepy atmosphere the whole time. Great sci-fi film with great questions.
This is the best episode of Star Wars Visions. It didn't try to bite more than it can chew (didn't misunderstand the whole Jedi/Sith trope like the other episodes do) and the 15 minutes duration didn't overstay the welcome. This is the episode worthy of its own series; even as it stands, with the air of mystery like that, it already feels like a pilot episode.
Anyway this is the one that I would say a proper Star Wars in anime form. This could pass as one of Expanded Universe episodes, perhaps sometime before The Phantom Menace (they even get the hairlock right!). It plays the classic master-apprentice dynamics with a cautious wise master teaching his over-eager apprentice itching for action (the dialogue about Jedi philosophy was excellent - something that sorely lacking in the new Disney Star Wars). They were drawn by the power of a dark entity, that might seem to have more secrets than what meets the eye (again, they did it right with the signature yellow-eyed dark side wielders!). There is enough suspense in this episode that I got to watch this seriously, and they also did the action choreography right as with other TRIGGER anime. Great characters as well.
My only complain about the episode is the kind of abrupt climax. Though if this is supposed to be a tease, then the episode did it really right.
The episode is built upon faulty premises.
Lightsaber prowess and force power are two different things. You can be proficient in lightsaber combat without having ANY force-sensitivity (e.g. Grievous) and the other way around, you can be masterful in force but lacking in lightsaber feat (e.g. Jocasta Nu).
Lightsaber crystal also doesn't reflect the wielder's sensitivity to sides of the force. You can be a morally uptight Jedi wielding red lightsaber (e.g. Adi Gallia) and a sith wielding blue (e.g. Exar Kun, or Anakin after he fell to the dark side. Notice when he was knighted as sith by Palpatine his saber's color DID NOT turn red). Red crystal is actually a synthetic color that can't be generated by lightsaber crystal. Sith forged it intentionally to channel their dark side.
HOWEVER the execution of this episode is good especially compared to other episodes so far.
The faulty premises end up being an important plot point, and a good one at that. Characters are quite well-developed given the very brief duration (perhaps except the villains). World-building, although sparse, gives quite a good idea of how lives looked like on that planet. Animation is really well-done especially the lightsaber combat and the chase scene. And the music is reminiscent of Star Wars without having to be exact copies of the films, which I really appreciate.
So if Production IG is given a much better brief to the mechanics of Star Wars universe, I believe they are much better suited to produce more Star Wars films than Disney currently does.
The mention of this being an "arthouse film" is inevitable due to some demographics strangely expecting this to be some action-packed Vikings or Game of Thrones (let's just say then thsi is a wrong film to watch). But I'd like to say that The Northman is much less arthouse-y than Robert Eggers' previous films like The Lighthouse.
Which is a good thing. The film is visceral, and it takes its time to build the atmosphere of tense, anger, anddiscomfrot through sequences of long shots and vivid hallucination as experienced by Amleth. I was expecting this to be much more arthouse-y especially in the beginning, but the film gets into the meat of the story very quickly in the beginning (the death of the king and Amleth's quest for revenge). Even during the long momentums Amleth spends to indulge himself in revenge is full of composites through the play of sound design, music, and shots of the character's emotion or their lucid imagination.
Although yes, the film does not draw the line between vision/hallucination with the actual events happening, and the ambiguous boundaries between magic and reality, there is almost none of the shot that feels like a filler as is common in arthouse films. I'd even say Amleth's imaginative battle to obtain the Draugr sword is not a waste of sequences as it sufficiently depicts his conquest of himself and his journey into the depths of revenge that he can only imagine prior but not actually take it.
Despite being testorone-inducing by showing sweaty muscular men fighting on the field (or on the bed with their women, at times), I find the film's aim to say about the pointlessness of revenge is clearly stated.
The sequences where Amleth realizes the situation with his father reclined him to reconsider his goal of revenge, only to gain enough drives when he realizes what it would cost in the future. And although the ending with triumphant music admittedly seems a bit ambiguously glorify Amleth's ambition to be awaited in valhalla, but we've shown the folly he has to go through and even when it had to cost him the people he thought would dear to him.
The last scene reminds me eerily of The Revenant - in fact, the whole film's bleakness reminds me of it. But if The Revenant's bleakness hinge upon the desolation, desperate, and cold world of DiCaprio's character's perilous attempt at survival, the grim world of The Northman inhabited by Skarsgaard's character is a world of sorcery, rage, and trollish vengeance of undying spirits.
I think Eggers has done a wonderful job in bringing to life the vengeful spirit of the Bjornulfr with his own style.
The film offers nothing new, but it's not as bad as reviews made it to be.
It comes with familiar tropes, even similar punchlines and comebacks ("careful with the words you choose" ala The Dark Knight). It's filled with dashing CGI visuals and intense slo-mo reminiscent of Snyder's styles, but lacking the dramatic buildup and especially suffer from tonal inconsistency where one grim situation is overshadowed by quips and sarcastic comebacks. In an almost mediocre attempt to mimic MCU - which in itself is already mediocre - it almost feels like a carbon copy of James Gunn's The Suicide Squad or Peacemaker.
However as a standard blockbuster it fits the exact cliche. Nothing serious to talk or think about. Just something to enjoy while you gulp your drinks and mash that popcorn, interspersed with disbelief remarked by your friends or family members.
The biggest crime this film has made is its excessive 2.5 hours, along with the unsatisfying red herring when it was revealed that the Big Bad was the real enemy all along. The film spends too much time in the conflict between Justice Society and Black Adam, which ends as nothing anyway. The full resolve of Black Adam to finally submit himself to surrender is immediately contradicted by the imminent danger of Sabbac, which resulted in leaving Dr. Fate's motivational speech with no impact and even kinda silly as the one who convinced Adam to surrender was Justice Society themselves.
Is it the worst movie in 2022? I've seen worse this year, including those with big hype like MCU films (which in my opinion warrants more scrutiny - what's the point of beating the underdogs like Black Adam?). But am I going to revisit this film? Not anytime even in a bit far future.
Such a downer ending for a great film in the first half. This film had everything right: the unique scifi aesthetics, the quirky characters, the comedy, the music. But the second half, especially in the last 45 minutes was just, in Zorg's word, disappointment.
The climax is the worst offender. The end of the world as we know it was just such a hurried, nonsense mess. If the planet can go to Earth instantly in the first place, why bother waiting and making some weird deal with Zorg? What the hell? What was the reason for that? The hunt for the ulimate weapon and the quest to activate it was resolved in less than 5 minutes (3 minutes per movie time) through some kindergarten puzzle.
Before the climax, the beatdown with the two big vllains (the mercs and Zorg) was disappointing. The big setup for the big showdown with the mercs was resolved by Bruce Willis being the unstoppable force Bruce Willis instead of impactful action like Die Hard. Zorg went down with the most cliche way a 90s villain can do: because of dumb stupidity.
Other than though, the film is great as everyone has said. The unique non-sleek non-white asthetics give unique touch to the imagination of retrofuturism. The funky crazy costume the characters wear paint a future that looks nothing like a cold, damp techy stuff we see in popular imagination, nor did it look like the gruffy grunge hard-boiled grit like in Dredd, but more like an embrace to the DIY and cyberpunk culture of the 80s. I like it.
Plot was unpredictable and very entertaining, taking you in an adventerous journey - up to the last 45 minutes. It went downhill so fast when the writers decided to just wrap up every plot point in one or two big bang bada boom.
Watch it once just for the experience, maybe revisit if you like the aesthetics.
Less an action-thriller film and more a film about a girl tagging along a professional killer.
There's barely any action until the last 15 minutes of the film - and it's not a well-executed Hollywood action (the SWAT team in particularly are tactically dumb). But the film's charm is not in action but in the relationship between Leon (Jean Reno) and Mathilda (Natalie Portman). Both performances are really good with the emotionally challenged Leon and young girl mistaking her feelings with a guardian for love. I watched the extended/director's cut where the film fleshes out fully the sexual tension between Leon and Mathilda (and Leon's continuous attempt to brush Mathilda's advances).
There's nothing really new in the writing or the plot, but I like that Leon doesn't take the traditional route of Hollywood action with the protege taking their master's mantle. It's literally just two persons trying to bond in a difficult situation they're facing. It's a very grounded film, albeit at times a bit stiff here and there, made by the great performances between the two casts and supporting role by Gary Oldman which buffoonery really contrasts the two and sometimes put the thrill back into the film. The only criticism is that, despite the excellent French-esque score, the music directing can be a bit strange at times, especially in the beginning, but it still hits the right note when Leon and Mathilda's scenes are on the focus.
The difficulty in watching classics is to judge them fairly in the time they were released.
The positive side is, while I have limited knowledge of 1980s animation, it is not too hard to see how the Akira excels in the animation quality, even today, particularly in the very first sequences with Kaneda's Capsule gang driving though the city night lights, and the climax with Tetsuo's blowing up to a gigantic mass and the extradimensional inflection with the ESPs.
The excellent animation is used masterfully for conveying the atmospheric world-building: the sky-high lives of Neo Tokyo with a drab scummy lives of its citizens, brutal police forces, and economic insecurities painting the world bleak. Perhaps the strongest aspect of this film that I wished they could've took us a walk a little bit further like the politician Nezu took us in a stroll around the city. And like Blade Runner, watching through the film I recognised how the plot points and the themes raised in this film would later be used very familiarly in many other science-fiction films, thus setting up the cyberpunk genre in the years to come.
However, speaking of plot and story, I would say that perhaps writing is not the aspect this film shines on. Characters leave much to be desired. They feel like devices for the plot to move forward, even with our main characters Kaneda and Tetsuo, and even the McGuffin Akira.
While I appreciate the film doesn't blurt out everything and treat the audience as smart, some genuine questionable plot points left me wondering: why did the ESPs lure a certain character? What was really the reason of the rebellion? What's the point of the last sequences with politician Nezu and the opposition Ryu? The film seems to save some points for a future setups (that seem to be never realized) and the awkward fade to blacks between scenes and unexplained sequences made me feel like I'm missing out something and have to check Wikipedia - something that I realize later that I have to find out in the source material (manga).
As the credit rolled, my mind wander, not unlike Tetsuo's, the possibility of remake (even a live action one) that could amplify the excellence of this film and connect the half-painted tods. That being said, Akira is still a masterful cornerstone of science fiction/cyberpunk material that deserves at least a watch in a lifetime.
If you plan to watch this because everyone keeps saying how this film is "different" from MCU films, stop right here.
That's a false advertisement. It's not a "black and white monster film from the '40s". Werewolf by Night is an MCU film through and through. There's nothing "different". Let me list:
And those are just from the top off my head. Sure you can find more if you're observant.
Well, sure Werewolf by Night is dressed in black and white but that's about it. It's a gimmick. It's not even trying to capture the essence of classic black and white films The Artist (2011) did it or build the atmosphere like Sin City (2005) did it. People saying this film is "different" from MCU needs to get their eyes checked and watch more films.
If you just wanted to watch an MCU, sure you get what you asked. But if you expected more, then whatever you heard about this film is a big fat hoax.
A historical naval war movie with good production value, nice cast, but a subpar screen writing.
As an admiral who famously defended the Korean strait with only 12 ships against 300+ Japanese adversaries, Yi Sun-Shin isn't written as an interesting character. His speech to boost the morale of his soldiers doesn't inspire any confidence, and his tactical genius doesn't really shine. 10 of his 12 ships fleet only show up in the last 15 minutes of the battle - which is strange, since his "turning fear to courage" tactic is supposed to bring more people into the battle. He really carried the whole battle by himself/his flagship, relying only on pure luck (whirpool, sea tides, and random clamoring of escaping civilians) and one small support from his XO.
In a similar vein, the Japanese antagonists are not written that interestingly. They're nothing but brute invaders. Either they're scaredy cats (Kato et al) or incompetent commanders who think too highly of themselves (Kurushima). The final battle scene, both against Kurushima and against the remaining Japanese fleet, feels really anticlimactic. The supposedly competent Kurushima just charges against storming arrows and the rest of the Korean ships somehow manage to barge against the remaining Japanese fleet relatively unscathed (and that's a lot of ships to barge).
And while the naval combat is good, the close combat sequences leave much room for improvement. You do get them interspersed within the naval battles.
Last, the last 15 minutes of the 1 hour battle scene is just full wishful thinking like what you typically see in Korean war movies regardless of setting, unfortunately. This is a shame since the event it's based on is a turning tide (pun intended) that merits a glorious depiction.
To sum it up: the first hour (story and drama building) is a-okay, the next 45 minutes is good war movie (war starts exactly after 1 hour), the next 15 minutes is anticlimactic and unsatisfying, and the rest 8 minutes is just happy ending and credits.
Still a worthwhile watch just for the production value alone though. :)
Space adventure film that starts on a high note but falls through in the second half. Have a nice world-building (I really liked the fact that here space age is multilingual) but suffers from terrible plotline. I don't have qualms with the plot being generic; the problem is it's rushed, incomplete, and tacked on.
The film follows a group of ragtag space scavengers (space sweepers) trying to make ends meet when they found a McGuffin (Dorothy) and try to figure out what to do with her.
Pretty decent premise to start the film with. In fact it did start with a banger space sequence where the scavengers race for getting the biggest haul to sell. However it had been off right from the start: the scene that preceded the scavengers competition was an exposition on how the big bad corporation has profited from the working classes and they struggle to make ends meet while the wealthy live a safe space life above the decaying earth. The exposition felt odd because right after that speech we get to see the lives of those working classes they talked about - and it was far from being meager and difficult. The good makeup of the casts don't help selling the 'tough life' narrative either.
The inconsistencies portrayed are consistent across the film, like it's struggling with the theme it's trying to portray. More than once the film tries to portray how our protagonists are being held hostage by debts (big numbers were shown), but then at one and another plot points (especially in the second half where it became pivotal to the climax), they just brushed it off, especially for the sake of portraying the protagonists' heroic comeback.
In a similar fashion, for a film that claims to be a critique against capitalism, the plot does not seem to understand how capitalism devalues the labor of the workers. For starters, the most obvious one is the absurdly ridiculous' plan of the villain to blow up Earth and blame it to the terrorist organization wherein Earth is where they get their workers. That's just complete nonsense only to make the villains appear cartoonishly/comically evil.
Speaking of villain, the big bad here is depicted to be a superhuman with some kind of power but we never get to see what it's supposed to be. They also hint that the villain exhibits some sort of contrived biological-determinist, utilitarian philosophy which seems to hint that actually it's not really about social class anyway, but "genetic defects"; however due to it being unnecessarily complicated and tacked on, it seems to serve as nothing more than a plot device to say that there is inequality. It kind of downplays the supposed critique against capitalism the film claims to have.
And speaking of tacked on... well, the film has a lot of it. The supposed terrorist organization turns out to be an "environmentalist" who just wants Earth to recover. What exactly they do to make that happen and why they are hunted are not exactly clear. The climax where the big bad's plan got revealed and leaked is kind of dumb and forced. You would imagine a multibillionaire who owned the conglomeration of media (they even mentioned this) would've prepared a PR spin and better security to not let his evil plan got out of his chambers. No way his fans would believe that "leak" instantly. See how Vought did it in The Boys or how Mao-Kikowksi did it in The Expanse. And, like I said before, the critique of capitalism itself feels really weak.
Okay, okay, some might say that it's a space action adventure film and plot isn't their strongest suite. So what about the action itself?
Choreography is bad, if not nonexistent at all. In the climax where our heroes fought the big bad's head of goons, there's almost no fight at all. It's just some camerawork when the hero got punched, another camerawork, then suddenly the hero turned the table and boom, she's dead. Other fight scenes are similar. Most of them consist of people getting beaten one-sidedly with no resistance from the other side. And there's one hilariously bad scene where Tae-ho (Song Joong-ki) who's supposed to be a child soldier, a prodigy who commanded the elites of the private army Space Force got cornered by a bunch of unarmed merchants, scavengers, and environmentalists who I assume have less combat experience than him.
The space fight and dogfight are no better. Well, the initial scavenger race is a banger, I give them that. But the others are not good. Especially not the final fight. Our protagonists and their allies of scavengers got the plot armor when they have to fight against squadrons of elite private army. Nobody died there except the baddies. Complete nonsense - makeshift spacetrucks' hull can survive better than elite spacefighters? They can maneuver better than train soldiers?
That being said,
The CGI is really good. Feels like Hollywood films, including the camerawork and all. World-building is quite rich and could serve as a good basis for a franchise. They have a trans robot and toy with the idea a little bit - a very refreshing take of the portrayal which would be loved by anyone familiar with cyberpunk and transhumanism genre.
The performances of the main casts are also good. Richard Armitage really sells his role as the big bad and Jin Sun-kyu as that tough uncle you can depend on. You can disregard the supporting casts though - they all feel really wooden. And despite trying to be on par with Hollywood films, I like that they still have the awkwardly Asian jokes (like fussing over how to bathe a toddler) and comically archetypical characters (the rebellious girl type, the prodigy type, the tough uncle type, the chattery overly concerned aunt type, and of course the child McGuffin).
Other than that there's not much to say about the film. It's a decent ride if you have almost 2,5 hours to spare, maybe during family gatherings. But I'm not going to revisit the film anytime soon. Well, maybe except to take screenshots.
I think the most interesting part about alternative history is imagining in what ways that the trajectory of history would differ from our own. Asking if it would be plausible for women in this timeline to fly and be astronaut is a wrong question; the better question to ask is how.
This episode takes "Soviet launching women on Mars" as its turning point among others - and it leaves more to be desired, as I wondered how the political climate that Gordo mentioned in passing (civil rights movement), the USA at the state of decline, and the "race for the base" would've factored in this decision. Since this show so far has not been a political thriller/drama, the questions remain unanswered and left as an exercise for the viewers, and that's fine I think. The episode instead focused on character relationships: between the Nixen Vixens (as one commenter put it) and between the other already established characters.
Although some parts of it are rather tacked on (the fanmail scene especially), it was interesting to see how Tracy was downplayed as "astro wife" due to the tokenistic demand by "the upstairs", her struggle overcoming it, and her conflict with Gordo. The bait and switch at the end is also nice with Tracy struggling with the exercises and the reveal at the end.
The best part however comes from the very 70-ish naming ("Moon Maiden" and "Meteor Maid"? Fancy) and the discovery of ice on the surface of the moon. Seems like it's getting scifi-ish from here.
This is certainly not The Boys' strongest season finale. The plots feel awkwardly resolved and the key plot points they've been developing just ended up as nothing. It feels really underwhelming. Of course there are some positive notes about this finale as well but bear with me, let's go through three most crucial problems for me.
First, Black Noir. What a disappointment. They've been building up Black Noir for at least four out of eight episodes in this season. They even showed him as a person, a real individual with emotion and vivid imagination this season after the previous two he had only been a mute killing machine. And he went down just like that. Sure the conversation between him and Homelander was tense - but that was it. Unfortunately, Black Noir's imaginative flashback, as I've suspected in the previous episodes, serve as nothing more than plot device to move the story forward.
Second, Soldier Boy. The hunt for the ultimate weapon to destroy Homelander ultimately just ended up in vain. Where did it go, the riled up spirit of The Boys in bringing Homelander down? They have the weakest excuses to portray this change of heart. With M.M.'s plot, well, I guess, okay, as he has his own personal vendetta against Soldier Boy, it's still understandable. This is to put aside that they went with the "Soldier Boy kills my family" plot too easily (we didn't get to ever see what actually happened and it's brushed off as nothing more than "racism", which is quite disappointing since there were plenty of rooms for flashback this season).
But then there's Butcher. He ended up beating down Soldier Boy because Soldier Boy hit his kid? I mean, sure it's his kid, but where's the man-with-a-mission-to-kill-Homelander-no-matter-what-it-takes that we've seen for all these three seasons? If Butcher was a little smarter - and he actually is with his cunning tactics and all! - he could've stopped Soldier Boy for a while, let Homelander pats Ryan's back, then when Ryan is out of sight just finish off Homelander by then. Soldier Boy doesn't even seem to hold anything against Ryan (especially after he knows Ryan is Butcher's son). The whole charade about beating up Soldier Boy is a really weak plot point just to let Homelander alive to be the ultimate big bad in next seasons.
Still here? We'll get to Homelander but let's talk about Maeve briefly. What's her end goal? At first she seems to be an ally ready to take down Homelander, but when it comes to actually facing Homelander she can't see the forest for the trees. Rather than staying true to her goal to kill Homelander, she was just absorbed with herself, punching Homelander around only to get herself beaten. Sure, Maeve isn't the most tactical ones, but she's been supplying Butcher with everything so far.
Last, Homelander. As soon as the fight ends, my biggest question is: what would be Homelander's yet another reason to NOT kill Butcher, Hughie, and co? Our Boys have been picking a fight with him since Season 1. It's clear our protagonists are pests to him, but he keeps giving them leeway. At this point isn't it easier to just get rid of them all when Ryan's not looking to prevent our Boys messing up with him again? There's a fan speculation that predicted Homelander is going to be depowered, then he's going to live the whole Season 4 under Vought's protection while our Boys track down the biggest big bad: Compound V. I think I like that better since it's going to show how Homelander will struggle with his weakness and humanity. But I guess the showrunners wanted to keep on getting Homelander more unhinged and even more unhinged and violent, as shown when he lasered a guy in a parade. With this direction, I'm expecting the show to end in a high note with chaos everywhere like perhaps in the comics. I just hope they don't prolong this much further - maybe Season 5 at most.
Then there's some plot devices like Tempo V, powering the army with V, etc that are left unexplored, which feels a bit like nothing more than filler to get the plot moves forward. And the fact that they kind of go with cliffhanger in this finale reminds me of Season 1's rather weak, cliffhanger-ish finale as well (perhaps that's their pattern: the real season finale is in the even-numbered seasons).
That said, this episode is still quite entertaining as it kept me guessing where the plot would go. It's not as frantic and riled up as Herogasm (Eps 6) and the direction is not quite satisfying, but it's fine. The theme of this season is "family", they stay true to that up to the finale. Soldier Boy's dialogue with Homelander is good. Talk about how toxic upbringing would make you become toxic as well, while thinking you can do better than your parents.
I like that they are planning to use the political plot with Neuman in Season 4 (I thought it was going to be wasted after the nice development in Season 2) as The Boys' forte is taking a jab at politics and corporatism. I do hope we will see what Stan Edgar envisioned as Vought "getting out of the supe business in the next five years."
I also like what they did with Ryan, coming together with Homelander, and the way Homelander is normalizing Ryan to violence. This is the consequence of Butcher's acting asshole-ish to everyone and sure hope our Boys will see the consequences of his action, especially with the sweet reunion with everyone at the table in the end (feels like the calm before the storm).
All in all, not a bad finale, but a bit too disappointing in the way they resolve the plots that have been built up all this season.
The key takeaway of the film, to me, is its subtle offhand remark of American yuppie culture; the tasteful thickness of the way they jab (okay I'll stop) at how everyone is trying to be like everyone else - "trying to fit in," in Bateman's words - that everyone mistakes someone for another and someone like Patrick Bateman can get away with murder.
The whole film is about him needing to fit in but at the same time stand out.
The film toys with the idea of the murder scenes being an imagination that all happened in Bateman's head, but I say the line is only drawn when the things get more ridiculous. It's even earlier than the one they displayed in the third act - when the ATM shows the message to feed it a cat - but when Bateman started hanging out in Paul Allen's apartment. An investigation was going on: why would Bateman intentionally spread their fingerprints all around? Partly perhaps he did want to get caught - the desire to find out who he really is beneath the mundane sameness of corporate life - as the conversation with the lawyer suggested. Partly, however, is his active imagination playing bigger and bigger role as he descended into madness in this third act, as you can see that right after that scene we get the ATM scene and the car explosion scene where even Bateman himself couldn't believe it just happened.
The director did admit that the ending give viewers a wrong impression of what really happened in the course of the film - so I'm basing my comments on that. The surreal last act seems to be ambiguous, but when you consider the change of demeanor from the realtor in Paul Allen's apartment (and the all-white, recently painted rooms) and the lawyer Bateman talked to, that should be telling of the point of the third act. The eerie interaction, tense acting, and the music really made the last act as the best of the film.
Even when the film is intended as a commentary of 1980s hedonistic yuppie culture, I can still see it being relevant today. The consumerist, "getting into the fad" corporatist culture endures even into the culture of Silicon Valley workers. Patrick Bateman is a that obnoxious guy who really likes to hear himself talk - the kind of Twitter people and YouTube video essayists with celebrity syndrome - and the whole Pierce & Pierce young executives competing against each other to sound smart and look posh are just your typical tech workers taking a jab at politics. Their understanding of the events are just skin deep, but they want to look like the best among themselves. This is why the film is great even in 2022 and I think it will stay great at least in the next 10 years.
Others might say that this is not as intense as previous episode, which might be true in terms of action and moving the plot forward. But I find this episode is still intense in a different way: more emotional investment.
"Family" and its unfortunately related cousin "abuse" seem to be the the theme that knits together different story arcs of the episode: the obvious Butcher flashback, Kimiko and Frenchie, MM with his family, Soldier Boy, and Homelander.
The episode kind of speeds up the pace in showing Soldier Boy's villainy through a recreation/imagination of Black Noir's flashback; although I'm not too comfortable that they present Noir's flashback at face value (instead of being an unreliable narrator), I think it still kinda works.
It is shown that Soldier Boy is an abusive, selfish bully with anger issues you would typically see among band leads or celebrity groups. While some have defended Soldier Boy's action by comparing him to Homelander ("at least Soldier Boy is not psychotic, emotionally unstable narcissist! He is a normal person not grown in lab!"), I think they missed the point of the show: the biggest issue here is exactly what would happen if people with power (influence) have additional power (literal superpower) while being protected by multi-billion dollar company. They possess all the impunity to wreak havoc. Like MM said, "no one should have the right to wield such power."
This theme of abuse is explicated with Butcher's flashback. No one is inherently "good" or "evil" - you are shaped by your upbringing. As the scenes between his memories, his reflection, and his projection in current time are cut seamlessly back and forth, Butcher slowly realizes that he mirrors the man he hated the most. Yet he fully accepts his succumbing to that darkness while bringing Hughie with him through his personal vendetta against the supes - not caring about the risk towards others who he claimed he loved. Even with parents, one may grow to be a contemptuous person if they live in an abusive family, and it's a cycle that is very difficult to break. Butcher's flashback is certainly the spotlight of the episode for me.
Even with Kimiko's story in the background (her saying that V only explicates what kind of person you are), considering that we've been shown how the character's social lives shaped them into what they are now - Kimiko with her abducted kid background, Hughie's insecurity with his zero to hero job, etc - the message stays strong, countering the superhero cliche of inherently morally good and evil person.
I'm hoping this dynamic could be further explored in the next episode (or season) with the Soldier Boy and Homelander encounter when it's revealed that Soldier Boy is Homelander's father, at least he feels so. An abusive father meets a narcissist kid-who'd-wanna-be-a-father. The ending of this episode becomes revealing when tied up to the earlier convesation between Homelander and Maeve: with Homelander echoing Soldier Boy's words that he "used to dream of having kids" with Maeve, it becomes apparent in this episode that the relationship between Homelander and Maeve (and Soldier Boy and Crimson Countess) it is not something exactly out of pure love.
"Having kids" is not a romantic statement: it's a purely masculine, self-centered ego of having someone of your blood - of your similarity - that you can be proud of. Who the partner is doesn't matter; they are only means to that end. And in that Soldier Boy shares something in common with Homelander as shown through his delight of accepting Homelander readily as his son, albeit lab-grown. He only wants to see a better version of him.
Last but not least, I love the jab at corporate this episode still throws. Ashley spinning breaking news about Starlight in a similar way Disney would spin stories about their abuse and mismanagement; and that A-Train being zombified, again, with the heart of Blue Hawk embedded in his body, serving only as Vought's puppet. I'm not sure if that's the most satisfying end to A-Train's arc, but seeing his disappointed, grim look, his lack of agency, I guess the character suffers a lot. I just hope this will be the last of his arc and the show doesn't squeeze him further.
That said, with the reveal at the ending, I am not sure I am 100% satisfied as I was expecting Soldier Boy bringing down Homelander, or rendering him powerless by the end of the season. Looks like Homelander will continue to be the main villain. I just hope they don't prolong the "mentally unstable" trope too much and find ways to keep the show interesting. Looking forward to the finale.
Most solid episode of the season so far. Nothing extraordinarily amazing, but it's just The Boys at its best like in the first half of Season 1.
What I like the most is that everything that happens leading to the climax in the Herogasm is just frantic, chaotic, a lot of stuff happening at once, unplanned, unpredictable, and consequently, tragic. Just a lot of things coming out together at the same time, including the tying up of loose ends of plot points (e.g. with A-Train's demise and his conflict with Hughie).
The episode keeps the comedy and jab at corporate speak intact, but does not overdo it so we get straight to the crux of the matter. From Homelander, Starlight, Kimiko/Frenchie, Hughie, A-Train, even Ashley - the plot revolving around those characters are about what makes them really them. They all have struggled with the question whether power (be it through V or executive position) made them into a terrible person they do not like, but it is all actually on them. Power only explicate their attitude. Like Butcher in the previous episode said, "With great power comes the absolute certainty, that you will turn into a right cunt."
It was interesting to see how each characters react: Hughie portrayed as an insecure man, A-Train tasting his own bitter medicine, Starlight getting tired of the play-pretend and politicking she has played all over the years, and of course, Homelander being Homelander. I find it especially best with Hughie and A-Train. Hughie, when in S1 he acted as our moral compass, here we see him as someone fragile, a man unable to keep up with the pace of the world he's living in and feeling defeated by his girlfriend for not being a breadwinner. A-Train, a great end to his arc, as he realizes that he has caused so many harms to others due to his toxicity, he realizes that he can only bring a little bit of justice for his own brother. He can't run away from his past like Frenchie said, I think it's very poetic.
Also it's refreshing to get a brief character development with Soldier Boy. Hoping that there is more to this character in the next seasons to come.
Last but not least, the fight with Homelander was intense. The unexpected Butcher x Hughie x Soldier Boy tag-team is great, especially with the confused, defeated look Homelander gave to them. I'm expecting this will drive Homelander even uncontrollable, especially now with his inner monologue and everyone either against him (Starlight, Maeve, if she is still there) or leaving him (Noir and possibly A-Train). The show seems to be planting the seed of conflict between our Boys in the future to come. Hopefully this will pay off.
Up until this episode The Boys Season 3 has been solid with only a few dents, but this episode the dents are getting bigger and they're kinda showing.
First of all, everything doesn't seem to be too well-paced here.
Butcher and Hughie just had a convo in previous episode about not showing him taking Tempo V, but then in the lab he just outright stormed the bullets and showing off to the others about his newfound power. And same with Hughie, who somehow got a dose too. Worse thing the lab situation doesn't seem to be even that bad. They don't seem to be outnumbered nor outgunned, and they've seen worse before. Facing Gunpowder, it's understandable why they'd need a V; but this? Seems kinda forced to me as if the writers need to just waste those Vs already.
Still on the lab: The Soldier Boy reveal seems to be a bit hurried. Butcher suddenly randomly opening up stuff while in fact they realize they're onto something dangerous which may or may not have Soldier Boy in the lab is not just reckless (we know Butcher is) but dumb. Aren't they there to find a superweapon? When Soldier Boy escaped, they just ended up stopping the search and went back home. Granted there's the situation with the team, but the whole thing about this supposedly mysterious Soldier Boy and the search for superweapon just feels really anticlimactic.
Then, the thing with Vicky and Stan Edgar. The way she outted Edgar is a surprising twist, and I kinda like that Homelander Magneto-esque speech about choosing their own kind. But it seemed to be paced oddly interspersed between fillers and actions going on with The Boys.
There are a few death flags as well (though hopefully it's just false ones): either KImiko or Frenchie or both with their "one last run" convo; MM with the "you're natural-born leader" convo; and of course Alex/Supersonic with the "I'm gonna help you cause it's the right thing to do." That's just a straight death flag and it's proven true by the end of the episode - which again, is kinda odd paced, seemingly coming out of nowhere.
To note that this isn't a bad episode at all, but it feels like things are kinda jumbled here and there, making watching especially the second half a bit tedious. Not to mention that the first half isn't as packed and well-structured as prev episodes (it's the moment they started playing the "3 seconds still shot" too much that I felt that it's a bit too filler-y). The A-Train Pepsi parody is well done though - The Boys is always the best at parody but I hope they can do more than that.
Hopefully it will get better.
A potentially great film being held hostage by its PG-13 rating and its messy, all over the places screenwriting.
By PG-13 I don't simply mean its visuals/goriness, but most importantly its dialogues, themes, and storytelling it tries to raise. Let me explain.
First, the dialogues.
The film opens with murder and Batman narrating the city's anxious mood. We get a glimpse of noir in this scene, but it soon falls flat due to a very uninteresting, plain, forgettable choice of words Batman used in his narration. Mind you, this is not a jab at Pattinson - Pattinson delivered it nicely. But there is no emotion in his line of words - there is no adjectives, there is no strong feelings about how he regards the city full of its criminals.
Here's a line from the opening scene. "Two years of night has turned me to a nocturnal animal. I must choose my targets carefully. It's a big city. I can't be everywhere. But they don't know where I am. When that light hits the sky, it's not just a call. It's a warning to them. Fear... is a tool. They think I am hiding in the shadows. Watching. Waiting to strike. I am the shadows." Okay? Cool. But sounds like something from a cartoon. What does that tell us about you, Batman?
Compare this to a similar scene uttered by Rorschach in Watchmen. "The streets are extended gutters and the gutters are full of blood. And when the drains finally scab over, all the vermin will drown. All those liberals and intellectuals, smooth talkers... Beneath me, this awful city, it screams like an abattoir full of retarded children, and the night reeks of fornication and bad consciences." You can say that Rorschach is extremely edgy (he is), but from that line alone we can tell his hatred towards the city, and even more so: his perspective, his philosophy that guides him to conduct his life and do what he does.
Rorschach's choice of words is sometimes verbose, but he is always expletive and at times graphic, making it clear to the audience what kind of person he is. Batman in this film does not. His words are always very safe, very carefully chosen, which strikes as an odd contrast to Pattinson's tortured portrayal of Batman as someone with a seemingly pent up anger. His choice of words is very PG-13 so that the kids can understand what Batman is trying to convey.
And this is not only in the opening scene. Throughout the film, the dialogues are written very plainly forgettable. It almost feels like the characters are having those conversations just to move the plot forward. Like that one encounter between Batman and Catwoman/Selina when she broke into the house to steal the passport or when Selina asked to finish off the "rat". They flow very oddly unnatural, as if those conversations are written to make them "trailer-able" (and the scenes indeed do appear on the trailer).
Almost in all crucial plot points the writers feel the need to have the characters to describe what has happened, or to explictly say what they are feeling - like almost every Gordon's scene in crime scene, or Selina's scene when she's speaking to Batman. It feels like the writers feel that the actors' expression just can't cut it and the audience has to be spoonfed with dialogues; almost like they're writing for kids.
Second, the storytelling.
Despite being a film about vengeance-fueled Batman (I actually like that cool "I'm vengeance" line) we don't get to see him actually being in full "vengeance" mode. Still in the opening we see Batman punching some thugs around. That looks a little bit painful but then the thugs seem to be fit enough to run away and Batman let them be. Then in the middle of the film we see Batman does something similar to mafias. Same, he just knocked them down but there's nothing really overboard with that. Then eventually in the car chase scene with the Penguin, Batman seem to be on "full rage mode", but over... what? He was just talking to Penguin a moment ago. The car chase scene itself is a bit pointless if not only to show off the Batmobile. And Batman did nothing to the Penguin after, just a normal questioning, not even harsher than Bale's Batman did to Heath's Joker in The Dark Knight - not in "'batshit insane' cop" mode as Penguin put it.
Batman's actions look very much apprehensive and controlled. Nothing too outrageous. Again, at odds with Pattinson's portrayal that seem to be full of anger; he's supposed to be really angry but somehow he still does not let his anger take the best of him. The only one time he went a bit overboard that shocked other characters is when he kept punching a villain near the end of the film. But even then it's not because his anger; it's because he injected some kind of drug (I guess some adrenaline shot). A very safe way to drop a parent-friendly message that "drug is bad, it can change you" in a PG-13 film.
And all that supposed anger... we don't get to see why he is angry and where his anger is directed at. Compare this to Arthur Fleck in Joker where it is clear as sky why Arthur would behave the way the does in the film. I mean we know his parents' death troubled him, but it's barely even discussed, not even in brief moments with Alfred (except in one that supposedly "shocking" moment). So... where's your vengeance, Mr. Vengeance? And what the hell are you vengeancing on?
Speaking of "shocking" moment... this is about the supposed Wayne family's involvement in the city's criminal affairs that has been teased early in the film. Its revelation was very anticlimactic: the supposed motive and the way it ended up the way it is, all very childish. If the film wanted the Wayne to be a "bad person", there's a lot of bads that a billionaire can do: tax evasion, blood diamond, funding illegal arms trade, fending off unions, hell, they can even do it the way the Waynes in Joker did it: hints of sexual abuses. But no, it has to be some bloody murder again, and all for a very trivial reason of "publicity". As if the film has to make it clear to the kids: "hey this guy's bad because he killed someone!" Which COULD work if the film puts makes taking someone's life has a very serious consequence. But it just pales to the serial killing The Riddler has done.
Even more anticlimactic considering how Bruce Wayne attempted to find a resolve in this matter only takes less than a 5 minute scene! It all involves only a bit of dialogues which boils down to how Thomas Wayne has a good reason to do so. Bruce somehow is convinced with that and has a change of heart instantly, making him looks very gullible.
And of course the ending is very weak and disappointing. First, Riddler's final show directly contradicts his initial goal to expose and destroy the corrupt elites. What he did instead is making the lives of the poor more difficult, very oxymoron for someone supposed to be as smart as him.
Second, the way Batman just ended up being "vengeance brings nothing and I should save people more than hurting people" does not get enough development to have him to say that in the end. Again - where's your vengeance? And how did you come to such character development if nothing is being developed on? And let's not get to how it's a very safe take against crime and corruption that closely resembles Disney's moralistic pandering in Marvel Cinematic Universe film.
Last, the visuals.
I'm not strictly speaking about gore, though that also factors in the discussion. The film sets this up as a film about hunting down a serial killer. But the film barely shows how cruel The Riddler can be to his victims. Again, back to the opening scene: we get it, Riddler killed the guy, but it does not look painful at all as it looks Riddler just knocked him twice. The sound design is very lacking that it does not seem what The Riddler done was conducted very painfully. Riddler then threw away his murder weapon, but we barely see blood. Yet when Gordon arrived to the crime scene, he described the victim as being struck multiple times with blood all over. What?
Similarly, when Riddler forced another victim to wear a bomb in his neck. The situation got pretty tense, but when the bomb eventually blow off, we just got some very small explosion like a small barrel just exploded, not a human being! I mean I'm not saying we need a gory explosion with head chopped off like in The Boys, but it does not look like what would happen if someone's head got blown off. Similarly when another character got almost blown off by a bomb - there's no burnt scar at all.
Why the hell are they setting up those possibly gory deaths and scars if they're not going to show how severe and painful these are? At least not the result - we don't need to see blood splattered everywhere - just how painful the process is. Sound design and acting of the actors (incl. twitching, for example) would've helped a lot even we don't see the gore, like what James Franco did in The 127 Hours or Hugh Jackman in Logan. In this film there's almost no tense at all resulting from those.
I'm not saying this film is terrible.
The acting, given the limited script they had, is excellent. Pattinson did his best, so did Paul Dano (always likes him as a villain), Zoe Kravitz, and the rest. Cinematography is fantastic; the lighting, angle, everything here is very great that makes a couple of very good trailers - perhaps one could even say that the whole film trades off coherency for making the scenes "trailer-able". The music is iconic, although with an almost decent music directing. And I guess this detective Batman is a fresh breath of air.
But all that does not make the movie good as in the end it's still all over the places and very PG-13.
Especially not with the 3 hours runtime where many scenes feel like a The Walking Dead filler episode.
If you're expecting a Batman film with similar gritty, tone to The Dark Knight trilogy or Joker, this film is not for you. But if you only want a live-action cartoon like pre-Nolan Batmans or The Long Halloween detective-style film, well, I guess you can be satisfied with this one.
